Euclidean, Spherical and Hyperbolic Shadows

Ryan Hoban

Consider this familiar related rates problem from freshman calculus:

([7] pg 181) A street light is mounted at the top of a 15-ft tall

pole. A man 6 feet tall walks away from the pole with a speed of

5 ft/sec along a straight path. How fast is the tip of his shadow

moving when he is 40 ft from the pole?

The standard solution uses similar triangles, a feature uniquely Euclidean,

but it can be solved another way using intersections of lines. The same

question can then be posed and solved in any geometry where we can compute

intersections of lines. Here we solve the problem for an individual walking in

the elliptic or hyperbolic plane. Working in the other geometries illustrates

key differences between the flat geometry of Euclidean space and these other

constant curvature, two dimensional geometries.

The setup

Let the individual have fixed height h and the lamppost have fixed height

l (of course assuming h < l). Let s be the length of the shadow and d

the distance from the base of the lamppost to the individual’s feet. A good

calculus student will draw the picture in Figure 1.

Solving the problem requires that we write s as a function of d. In the

Euclidean plane, the ground is a straight line, as is the light ray from the lamp

1

h

l

sd

H

T

F

L

Figure 1: The setup in the Euclidean plane.

through the top of the individual’s head. In the other two plane geometries we

draw similar schematic pictures. We assume that the ground is flat and the

light ray travels along a straight path, that is both are distance minimizing

curves in the appropriate geometry. Such a curve is called a geodesic.

Figure 2 is the setup in spherical geometry, shown both on the sphere and

after stereographic projection to the plane. Figure 3 gives the setup in two

models of hyperbolic geometry, the Poincare unit disk and the upper half

plane ([1] describes these models).

We compute s as a function of d in each geometry. The result is a fantastic

illustration of the effect curvature has on these, and nicely illustrates the

duality between spherical and hyperbolic geometry.

Before reading the remainder of this article, the reader might enjoy ex-

amining figures 2 and 3 to get some intuition for what to expect from the

shadow in each geometry. If imagination is not enough, the animations avail-

able online at [3] should convince you that the shadow on the sphere is peri-

odic, while in the hyperbolic plane the shadow length grows to infinity very

2

l

d

h

L

H

F=T

l

dh

s

H

L

F

T

Figure 2: The setup in spherical geometry.

rapidly. The computations are a bit complicated, but the pictures make the

complicated formulas believable.

Euclidean Shadows

To solve the problem, we are led to write down the shadow length s as a

function of Stickman’s distance d from the base of the light post. We assume

that the ground lies along the x-axis and the light post along the y-axis.

This enables us to write the equation of the light ray from the light source

through the top of Stickman’s head.

y =(h−ld

)x+ l

The tip of the shadow is the x-intercept of this line,(ldl−h , 0

). The shadow

length is simply the distance from the shadow tip to Stickman’s feet, i.e.

3

Figure 3: The setup in hyperbolic geometry.

s = dist(feet,shadowtip)

= dist

((d, 0) ,

(ld

l − h, 0

))= d

(h

l − h

) .

We see that shadow length is directly proportional to the distance walked.

The shadow becomes arbitrarily long, but always has finite length. The

problem can be finished by differentiating to obtain the rate of change of

shadow length and adding it to the speed of the individual moving on the

ground.

4

Spherical Shadows

Let’s now compute s as a function of d assuming Stickman walks in spherical

geometry. The standard model for spherical geometry is the unit sphere

centered at the origin in R3. Here geodesics are great circles, that is the

intersection of the unit sphere with linear subspaces of R3. Points in spherical

geometry are represented by unit vectors in R3 and the Euclidean metric on

R3 induces a metric on the sphere. The spherical distance between two points

is simply the Euclidean arc length along the great circular arc connecting

these points. Let SD(u, v) denote the spherical distance between unit vectors

u and v, which is related to the dot product by

cos (SD(u, v)) = u · v.

We assume that the ground is the sphere’s equator and the light post lies

along a meridian. Observe that the ground then has finite length 2π and the

farthest the light can be away from the ground is π2. Even before working

out the computation, Figure 4 makes it clear that there is a key difference

between l = π2

and l < π2. Specifically, when l = π

2, the light ray intersects

the top of Stickman’s head at a right angle, then runs along his body, so

no shadow is produced. He is always standing directly under the light, no

matter where he walks. Figure 4 also suggests that if l < π2, the shadow

length will be periodic, not surprising as the whole geometry is finite.

Now for some coordinates. Suppose the base of the lamp is at

1

0

0

.

If the light post lies along the meridian through that point and has height l,

then the light source is at L =

cos(l)

0

sin(l)

. After walking distance d from the

base of the light post then Stickman’s feet are at F =

cos(d)

sin(d)

0

. Assuming

5

l

d

h

L

H

F=T

l

d

hs

LH

FT

Figure 4: Stickman on the sphere.

Stickman has height h, the top of his head is at H =

cos(d) cos(h)

sin(d) cos(h)

sin(h)

.

We can now determine the geodesic light ray which forms the shadow.

The light source L and the top of Stickman’s head H are unit vectors in

R3 which determine a unique plane through the origin. The intersection of

that plane with the unit sphere is the geodesic light ray. The shadow tip

is the intersection of this plane with the equator. The tip of the shadow,

T , is determined by the fact that it lies along the intersection of the plane

containing L and H and the equatorial plane - and the fact that it is a unit

vector. Its coordinates are found by solving simultaneously (L×H) · T = 0,

‖T‖ = 1 and z = 0,

This system has 2 antipodal solutions. With the aid of a computer algebra

system we obtain:

6

T =

cos(d) cos(h) sin(l)−sin(h) cos(l)√

−2 cos(d) sin(h) cos(h) sin(l) cos(l)+sin2(h) cos2(l)+cos2(h) sin2(l)sin(d) cos(h) sin(l)√

−2 cos(d) sin(h) cos(h) sin(l) cos(l)+sin2(h) cos2(l)+cos2(h) sin2(l)

0

.

The shadow length s is the spherical distance from the Stickman’s feet F

to the tip of the shadow T . We find that

cos(s) = F · T

=cos(h) sin(l)− cos(d) sin(h) cos(l)√

−2 cos(d) sin(h) cos(h) sin(l) cos(l) + sin2(h) cos2(l) + cos2(h) sin2(l)

This is indeed complicated and scary, but note that if l = π2

the entire

expression simplifies to cos(s) = 1. In this case shadow length is identically

0, as expected. Figure 5 graphs s as a function of d for fixed light height

l = π3

and various choices for h. The shadow length is periodic. What is less

obvious is that as h→ l the relationship between s and d approaches a linear

relationship, though not uniformly.

Π 2 ΠDist Walked

-Π

2

0

Π

2

Shadow Length

Figure 5: Spherical shadows lengths.

7

Hyperbolic Shadows

What if Stickman is walking in the hyperbolic plane? For readers unfamiliar

with this geometry there are a myriad of great references. Specifically [1],

[4] and [5] are excellent introductions. The many different models of the

hyperbolic plane often present a challenge when first learning the subject

as Euclidean and spherical geometry each have a single standard model.

The relationships between different models however is key to understanding

hyperbolic geometry as each model has its own advantages & disadvantages.

Anderson ([1]) does a particularly good job relating the various models.

For computational ease, we work in the upper half plane model. This is

the upper half of the complex plane {x + iy : y > 0}. The geodesics are

either vertical rays or circular arcs intersecting the real axis at a right angle.

z1

w1

z1*

w1*=¥

z2

w2

z2* w2

*

Figure 6: Typical geodesics in the upper half plane.

For the shadow problem, we need a formula for distances. Given distinct

points z and w in the upper half plane we connect these with a geodesic

segment. If Re(z) = Re(w) this is the vertical line segment connecting z and

w, otherwise it is a circular arc. Extend this geodesic segment to a complete

geodesic and observe that this intersects R ∪ {∞} twice. The endpoints are

8

called ideal points and we denote them by z∗ and w∗, so that z is between

z∗ and w. If the geodesic is a vertical line, one of the ideal endpoints is ∞(see figure 6). Let HD(z, w) denote the hyperbolic distance between z and

w, which by definition is

HD(z, w) =

ln(

(z−w∗)(w−z∗)(w∗−w)(z∗−z)

)if neither z∗ nor w∗ is ∞

ln(

Im(z)Im(w)

)if z∗ =∞

ln(

Im(w)Im(z)

)if w∗ =∞

(1)

.

To calculate s as a function of d, assume the ground is the positive imag-

inary axis and the base of the light post is at i. If the light post is per-

pendicular to the ground then it lies along the the unit circle. The lamp

then has a distance l from i, and this is the point L = tanh(l) + i sech(l).

After walking along the ground a distance d, Stickman’s feet are at F = ied.

Assuming he is standing upright means his body lies along the circular arc

centered at the origin of radius ed. Since his height is h, the top of his head

is H = ed(tanh(h) + i sech(h)). The reader is encouraged to use 1 to check

that HD(i, F ) = d, HD(i, L) = l and HD(F,H) = h. In fact an excellent

exercise would be to derive these coordinates yourself (Hint: The lamp post

has its base at i and the ideal points of that geodesic are −1 and 1).

Let T denote the tip of the shadow, the intersection of the geodesic light

ray with the ground. The light ray is the geodesic arc through L and H,

which we can explicitly compute. The fact that it intersects the real axis at

a right angle means that the circle is centered at some point on the real axis,

say x0. If r is its radius, then this geodesic satisfies the equation

(x− x0)2 + y2 = r2.

Substituting in the real and imaginary parts of L and H, we obtain a

system with unknowns x0 and r

9

h

l

d

s

L=tanhHlL+i sechHlL

H=edHtanhHhL+i sechHhLL

F=ied

T

Figure 7: The setup in the upper half plane.

(tanh(l)− x0)2 + ( sech(l))2 = r2

(ed tanh(h)− x0)2 + (ed sech(h))2 = r2,

which we can solve for x0 and r. With the aid of a computer algebra system

we obtain

T = i

√ed(tanh(h)−ed tanh(l))ed tanh(h)−tanh(l)

.

To compute s we simply need the distance from F to T . Since these

points both lie on the imaginary axis the distance is

s = ln

(e−d

√ed (tanh(h)− ed tanh(l))

ed tanh(h)− tanh(l)

)(2)

.

10

We now have the desired relationship between s and d. This looks com-

plicated but a brief analysis confirms what we might already suspect. Note

that s is undefined if the numerator or denominator of the radicand becomes

zero. This occurs when

d = d0 = ± ln(

tanh(l)tanhh

).

This has a wonderful interpretation. After walking a finite distance d0 in

either direction Stickman’s shadow has infinite length! Figure 8 illustrates

this. When d = d0 the hyperbolic ray forming the shadow becomes a vertical

line which does not intersect the imaginary axis (ground). When d = −d0the ray will becomes a circular arc whose endpoint is the origin which also

does not intersect the positive imaginary axis. What a sharp contrast with

the Euclidean case, where the shadow always is finite.

ie-d0

tanhHlL+i sechHlL

tanhHlL+i tanhHlL cschHhL

ied0

Figure 8: A finite distance from the lamp, Stickman’s shadow becomes infi-

nite.

11

Duality

We conclude with a comparison of these seemingly unrelated geometries.

Figure 9 graphs the solutions for each geometry for fixed l and h satisfying

0 < h < l < π2.

d=d0

hyperbolic

Euclideanspherical

Π 2 Πd

-Π

2

0

Π

2

s

Figure 9: Shadow length s as a function of d in all three geometries.

Recall that the solution in the hyperbolic case was

s = ln

(e−d√

ed(tanh(h)−ed tanh(l))ed tanh(h)−tanh(l)

).

Taking cosh of both sides and then applying a handful of hyperbolic

trigonometric identities, we rewrite this as

cosh(s) = cosh(d) sinh(h) cosh(l)−cosh(h) sinh(l)√cosh2(l) sinh2(h)−2 cosh(d) cosh(h) cosh(l) sinh(h) sinh(l)+cosh2(h) sinh2(l)

.

Compare this with the solution obtained in the spherical case which was

cos(s) = cos(h) sin(l)−cos(d) sin(h) cos(l)√cos2(l) sin2(h)−2 cos(d) sin(h) cos(h) sin(l) cos(l)+cos2(h) sin2(l)

.

12

These formulas make dramatically clear the duality between spherical and

hyperbolic geometry. In particular since cosh(iθ) = cos(θ) and sinh(iθ) =

i sin(θ), we can transform the hyperbolic relationship into the spherical one

by multiplying all variables by −i. It can be shown that if all variables

are small, the solutions are approximately Euclidean. In other words, the

solutions agree up to first order. Stickman should be assured that if his

journey is in a direction with curvature close to zero and he doesn’t walk too

far, his shadow will behave approximately as in flat Euclidean space.

Final Remark

My own motivation for this came after answering the original question for a

calculus class, then realizing that our solution using similar triangles was only

applicable in Euclidean geometry. When teaching an undergraduate course

one should pay attention when unnecessarily making implicit use of Euclidean

geometry. Many classical problems from pre-calculus and calculus use facts

about triangles or Euclidean trigonometry, and you can answer the same

questions in spherical or hyperbolic trigonometry. I don’t advise confusing

students first learning calculus with these issues, but exciting investigations

are there to be found by changing the geometry.

Acknowledgment I am grateful to the referees for many helpful com-

ments on this paper. I would like to thank William Goldman for all of his

patience and support, as well as Anton Lukyanenko, Stefan Mendez-Diez,

Andy Sanders and Robin Shutinya for helpful feedback on this project. I am

grateful for support from the University of Maryland Mathematics Depart-

ment, and the National Science Foundation grant of Goldman, DMS070781.

13

References

[1] J. Anderson, Hyperbolic Geometry, Springer Verlag, London UK, 2005

[2] A. Baragar, A Survey of Classical and Modern Geometries, Prentice

Hall, 2001

[3] R. Hoban, University of Maryland Mathematics Department (2008)

http://www.math.umd.edu/∼rfhoban/Shadows.html

[4] Mumford, Series, & Wright, Indra’s Pearls: The Vision of Felix Klein,

Cambridge University Press, Cambridge UK,2002

[5] M. Helena Noronha, Euclidean and Non-Euclidean Geometries, Prentice

Hall, Upper Saddle River NJ, 2002

[6] J.G. Ratcliffe, Foundations of Hyperbolic Manifolds, Graduate Texts in

Mathematics vol. 149, Springer-Verlag NY, 1994

[7] J. Stewart, Single Variable Calculus Thomson Brooks/Cole, The Thom-

son Corporation, Belmont CA, 2005

[8] W. Thurston, Three Dimensional geometry and topology, Vol. 1 (S.

Levy ed.) , Princeton Mathematical Series, Princeton University Press,

Princeton NJ, 1997

14